* Because sometimes the application of the law seems like an indecent proposal: Demi Moore is “in absolute shock” because she may be facing a lawsuit for negligent supervision due to a pool drowning that occurred at her home while she was out of the country. [Fox News]
* “The bow tie is a manifestation of my unwillingness to become part of the rabble.” Male lawyers face harsh criticism about their fashion choices, too, and these New Jersey attorneys will wear their bow ties with pride, no matter what. [Bergen Record]
* In a recent interview, Justice Alito critiqued his SCOTUS colleagues for adopting a seemingly limitless interpretation of the 14th Amendment: “I don’t know what the limits of substantive liberty protection under the 14th Amendment are at this point.” [Legal Times]
* If you’d like to be a federal appellate judge by the age of 35, then Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit has some advice for you. First and foremost, know where to “peddle your wares” — get a job in Washington, D.C., ASAP. [Concurring Opinions via ABA Journal]
* Managing partners, repeat this mantra: Don’t do a Dewey! Thanks to the D&L financial disaster, Biglaw firms have decided to cut back on or ditch bank loans completely and get by with a little help from their
friendspartners in times of need. [Wall Street Journal]
Litigation finance is a funding tool many companies are considering to help cover the fees and expenses related to major legal claims. We at Lake Whillans Litigation Finance have compiled a list of questions to help you determine if your client is a candidate for litigation finance.
Are porn stars’ rights deserving of strict scrutiny?
* Airport security has forbidden joking about bombs and hijacking. Now TSA is cracking down on joking about TSA itself. In the interest of my next flight, “I love you, TSA!” [Daily Mail]
* A detailed analysis of the 14th Amendment’s role in the debt ceiling debate. President Obama should employ this solution now before the Supreme Court realizes there’s another part of the 14th Amendment they can overturn. [Main Street]
* Law school professors do not take kindly to your antics. [Law Prof Blog]
* A Cooley Law professor is arguing against gay rights. Sorry, a Western Michigan Law professor is arguing against gay rights. [Pride Source]
* The rules don’t apply to Yale or Harvard. Or at least the rules don’t apply to their law reviews. [Professor Bainbridge]
* Congress is still trying to decide how to regulate FM radio instead of looking at salient issues in modern copyright law. Given how brilliantly they keep the government open, maybe FM radio is the biggest issue we should give them right about now. [The Daily Caller]
* The lawyer as generalist is fading into obscurity. Let’s commemorate it in poetry, shall we? [Poetic Justice]
* A preview of some upcoming Supreme Court cases this week. Complete with cartoons! [The Spark File]
* Finally, here’s a little gem for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg fans that we got….
It is now considered unconstitutional to stop and frisk New Yorkers solely on the basis of race.
Justice Stevens defends the decision in Maryland v. King to an audience of folks who could not disagree more.
* If you’ve been waiting for the definitive, Kashmir Hill, what in the hell is Catfishing article, here you go. [Not-So Private Parts / Forbes]
* Let me just say that societies that fully utilize the talents of women have an inherent advantage over the ones that don’t. With one rules change, we now have twice as many potential combat soldiers. Glory. [Daily Beast]
* A “Good Samaritan” gun owner defended a little boy from pit bulls by shooting at the dogs who were mauling the little boy. Look, as a dad, can I just say that if you see some pit bulls attacking my son, please help… by running at the pit bulls and saying, “Git, git away from that boy,” not by shooting a freaking hand cannon towards my child! [Cato @ Liberty / Cato Institute]
* Okay, who has standing to sue for a violation of the 27th Amendment? Who? I want this to happen. Come on, constitutional scholars. Make it happen. Let’s see who really cares about “all” the amendments, not just the ones that allow people to shoot each other. [The Note / ABC News]
* I mean we’re suing over sandwiches, aren’t we? [Legal Blog Watch]
* Slow your roll, NAACP. I’m pretty sure that the 14th Amendment doesn’t protect the rights of black people to become diabetic with oversized sugary drinks. [Gawker]
* I’m flying this weekend for the first time in over a year (it couldn’t be avoided). I’ll need to brush up on what rights I still retain during air travel. As long as I acknowledge TSA’s droit du seigneur to my wife, I’m allowed to carry an unopened water bottle on board, right? [Legal […]
The impasse over the debt ceiling continues. Could an obscure provision of the Fourteenth Amendment ride to the rescue of President Obama? Legal scholars discuss.
ATL Academy For Private Practice Volume 1 – Getting Started offers a mix of deeply informed, sometimes contrarian, but always thoughtful insight into meeting the challenges of starting and optimizing your own practice. Click here to download.
I’m not a constitutional scholar, and I didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn last night. But I really struggle to find the ambiguity in this line from the Fourteenth Amendment: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State […]